I'm planning a re-do for my emerald cut. 3 stone plans - and I need help

[MMtwo]

The story: This is a funky L colored stone that I love for the strong blue florescence, the phosphorescence and the clear crystal inclusions. It's a 1.7 too, so not so tiny, but not too big. Which brings me to this post. I have DSS. I had it set in a wide gold band locally about a year ago. I almost moved forward with another halo solution, but that's probably not right for me. I like bezels and plain things, I like lines and simplicity. I usually beeline for my simple rings. I already have a halo on the old cut e-ring.

I think a 3-stone will tick the box. The other part of the plan is the side stones should be L to match, with fluorescence too. I want to be able to clean the bottom of the stones, so I would like a relatively open gallery. I think this will be a great DK project. One of the reasons I tend to go for pre-designed rings is this process scares me to bits and I have no clue what I am doing.

However, my first hurdle is figuring out a perfect complimentary side stone size to the main diamond. 7.61 x 5.60 x 3.98 mm
I have two medium blue fluorescent .50s in my cart from a vendor that are 5.28 x 3.75 x 2.53 mm and 5.27 x 3.83 x 2.69 mm. Then the whole ring can be fun in black light.

I played with a program (Real Draw V) I have and measured out the sizes and get this:

Is this a good ratio? It would then be a 2.7 ring...not too small


The nerdy diamond in the current setting (it sometimes has a weird pink cast outside in very stong sunlight). It's a Si2... I know not everyone's cuppa.

 

[Dreamer_D]

I love your diamond and actually suggested a 3 stone when you posted about a reset in your other thread but deleted my post when I saw you say you had purchased the halo mount… so I am very happy to have seen you going this direction!

My experience is that a three stone absolutely increases the visual impact of a ring and helps DSS a lot. Step cuts are very subtle though and the impact of the three stone won’t be as pronounced. I wonder if you would consider colored gemstone sides? I think it would be very special. You could also pair square shaped or elangated cushion colored gems (I’d do sapphire or spinel).

I also like EC paired with rounds but this might work better in an antique setting rather than the modern look you prefer:

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

Another option is large Cadillac or stent shields which also are step cuts but some varieties have more facets than emeralds and that might enhance the sparkle and add visual interest because the cut “texture” is different than the center.

If you like the three EC look though I like the proportions you chose, though if budget allows, I’d go bigger as bigger facets = more sparkle = better hand presence. Perhaps .75?

 

[freddyboston]

I think a 3-stone will tick the box. The other part of the plan is the side stones should be L to match, with fluorescence too. I want to be able to clean the bottom of the stones, so I would like a relatively open gallery. I think this will be a great DK project. One of the reasons I tend to go for pre-designed rings is this process scares me to bits and I have no clue what I am doing.

However, my first hurdle is figuring out a perfect complimentary side stone size to the main diamond. 7.61 x 5.60 x 3.98 mm
I have two medium blue fluorescent .50s in my cart from a vendor that are 5.28 x 3.75 x 2.53 mm and 5.27 x 3.83 x 2.69 mm. Then the whole ring can be fun in black light.

I love it !!!

 

[MMtwo]

I love your diamond and actually suggested a 3 stone when you posted about a reset in your other thread but deleted my post when I saw you say you had purchased the halo mount… so I am very happy to have seen you going this direction!

My experience is that a three stone absolutely increases the visual impact of a ring and helps DSS a lot. Step cuts are very subtle though and the impact of the three stone won’t be as pronounced. I wonder if you would consider colored gemstone sides? I think it would be very special. You could also pair square shaped or elangated cushion colored gems (I’d do sapphire or spinel).

I also like EC paired with rounds but this might work better in an antique setting rather than the modern look you prefer:

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

Another option is large Cadillac or stent shields which also are step cuts but some varieties have more facets than emeralds and that might enhance the sparkle and add visual interest because the cut “texture” is different than the center.

If you like the three EC look though I like the proportions you chose, though if budget allows, I’d go bigger as bigger facets = more sparkle = better hand presence. Perhaps .75?

Thanks so much! I really appreciated your insight. I was torn between adding more subtle sparkle or going with a brilliant cut. It took me a little while to circle back, but your suggestions gave me some great ideas to research. I'm keeping a close eye on the overall cost versus the center stone—I don’t want to "over-improve" a stone that was a great deal during a market dip I couldn’t replicate now.


I’ve looked into diamond emerald cuts with low color and medium fluorescence, but the selection with similar shapes and sizes tend to be quite small. Going up to .75 ct would be ideal, but I haven’t been able to find a matching pair in budget—not on Ritani or Blue Nile. Still on the hunt, though.


The colored gemstone idea is also intriguing. I did some browsing, but finding high-quality natural stones that match well (and are emerald cut, of course—OCD demands it!) within budget is definitely a challenge. I loved the mixed vintage cut you shared, but it’s just not my vibe. Truthfully, I never wear the more intricate or frilly diamond pieces I already own—I always reach for simple studs, gold drops, or solitaire styles.


I’m leaning more and more toward a modern, linear aesthetic with no fussy elements. It’s definitely time to downsize and curate a collection that fits that look. Jewelry for the deeply pragmatic—LOL. /end rant

 

[MMtwo]

I love it !!!

Thanks freddy! I would love to find a pair of very strong fluorescent sides, but no luck yet. Wouldnt that be cool, or even a pair that fluoresce other colors? What fun that would be!

 

[Dreamer_D]

I think you should create a ring you will adore and not worry if the sides and setting are more expensive than the center stone. The end overall look is what matters IMO. My five stone is my favourite piece and because I got the diamonds cheap the setting cost more than the stones. Still glad I spent for a truly gorgeous piece that beings me pleasure.

I would encourage you to consider asking DK to source the stones you want if you aren’t having luck on your own. If you went with colored gems, similar caveat would apply in that you would need to ask an expert to source them (I would work with Yvonne Raley) but if you are set in EC sides I would say scrap that as it’s a very rare cut in colored gems other than emeralds.

For three stone EC I definitely think it’s worth taking time or spending more (eg recruiting help to source) for larger sides because I think it will increase bling and also it is a look that I think screams glamour.

 

[MMtwo]

I think you should create a ring you will adore and not worry if the sides and setting are more expensive than the center stone. The end overall look is what matters IMO. My five stone is my favourite piece and because I got the diamonds cheap the setting cost more than the stones. Still glad I spent for a truly gorgeous piece that beings me pleasure.

I would encourage you to consider asking DK to source the stones you want if you aren’t having luck on your own. If you went with colored gems, similar caveat would apply in that you would need to ask an expert to source them (I would work with Yvonne Raley) but if you are set in EC sides I would say scrap that as it’s a very rare cut in colored gems other than emeralds.

For three stone EC I definitely think it’s worth taking time or spending more (eg recruiting help to source) for larger sides because I think it will increase bling and also it is a look that I think screams glamour.

Thank you and I agree that it is best to build it as something that hits "adore" level. I'm glad that you love your five stone so much. I'll go look for it.
edit: https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/dreamer’s-20th-anniversary-oec-five-stone-ring.288581/ ..........found it! It is beautiful! Also love your old cut 3 stone! What delicate rings!

Luckily, there is no time limit on this. I do see your point about larger side stones. I do want it to be enough "oomph" to enjoy the coverage. I would hate to wish it were bigger in the end.

 

[tyty333]

In your first picture, the stone on the right looks smaller than the stone on the left. Is that an optical illusion (there are no
prongs on the outer side of the right-hand diamond)? Something is throwing me off.

 

[MMtwo]

In your first picture, the stone on the right looks smaller than the stone on the left. Is that an optical illusion (there are no
prongs on the outer side of the right-hand diamond)? Something is throwing me off.

You have a good eye. The squares are the same size but the fake prongs are off. I'll reconfigure with .8 stones and repost. Also, I think I flipped one diamond graphic.

 

[MMtwo]

This would be a .8 side diamond x 2

 

[oncrutchesrightnow]

Agree that you should ask DK to source the stones. You might save money, too.

A couple more ideas…

-5-stone emerald
-3-stone emerald with bullets taking up the rest of the space

 

[Dreamer_D]

Agree that you should ask DK to source the stones. You might save money, too.

A couple more ideas…

-5-stone emerald
-3-stone emerald with bullets taking up the rest of the space

I like the idea of a five stone, both these options are great.

I vastly prefer the larger sides. I realize there is budget to consider, but if it’s possible I’d even consider doing bigger. I would probably prefer that over a five stone, though I gotta say there is something very luxurious about a five stone ring that may be quite satisfying for you to wear.

 

[Lookinagain]

This would be a .8 side diamond x 2

I actually like the smaller sides more than this version. What size is your finger?

 

[MMtwo]

Honestly, hubby and I were just looking at this and he said the same. I wear a 6.75. I don't want the side stones to get in the working path of the other fingers.

Here’s my real estate;

 

[MMtwo]

With the smaller sides, that covers 13.18, not counting any goldwork. That would make the diamond coverage about 68%, not counting gaps and design. That would probably still be comfortable.

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

This would be a .8 side diamond x 2

Oof. Now my taste is all in my mouth but have you considered .7, a bit smaller?

 

[MMtwo]

I'm leaning towards the smaller, just looking at the size in relation to my finger.

 

[Ibrakeforpossums]

Proportion, Your finger is not large,

 

[Dreamer_D]

I don’t think it’s a bad choice to go for smaller sides, but just for information, you can go like 17-18mm and not hit your side fingers, not even close. The stones are set at least 5mm above the finger and wrap around. There is way more room than you think.

 

[maryjane04]

Aww I am so excited for you @MMtwo and your stone is lovely! I love that you have picked out similar traits for the side stones.

I can't wait to see what you end up with. But I love the 5 stone suggestion. I remember back in the day I swooned over LM's 5 stone.. Let me find a link.. oh sorry it has traps and bullets which might be more expensive than the 3 stone option.

https://leonmege.com/jewelry/leon-m...ids-bullets-classic-five-stone-ring-platinum/

 

[oncrutchesrightnow]

I like the idea of a five stone, both these options are great.

I vastly prefer the larger sides. I realize there is budget to consider, but if it’s possible I’d even consider doing bigger. I would probably prefer that over a five stone, though I gotta say there is something very luxurious about a five stone ring that may be quite satisfying for you to wear.

I don’t think it’s a bad choice to go for smaller sides, but just for information, you can go like 17-18mm and not hit your side fingers, not even close. The stones are set at least 5mm above the finger and wrap around. There is way more room than you think.

Agree — I have a 6.5ring finger and a five stone that is ~20mm of diamonds. Does not rub at all (DK made it). I was thinking, keep the three stones in the large size, and add two smaller stones on either side.

Or you could go with even bigger side stones!

 

[MMtwo]

@maryjane04 thank you! that ring design is amazing. I love that look.

@oncrutchesrightnow , I really like the five stone idea. I probably will go the smaller size though. I prefer the look. I like the idea of finishing out with horizontal tapered baguettes or bullets to finish. I also do like the look of a tapered side stone. Not sure if I could find low color matching and medium to strong fluorescent though

 

[Dreamer_D]

@maryjane04 thank you! that ring design is amazing. I love that look.

@oncrutchesrightnow , I really like the five stone idea. I probably will go the smaller size though. I prefer the look. I like the idea of finishing out with horizontal tapered baguettes or bullets to finish. I also do like the look of a tapered side stone. Not sure if I could find low color matching and medium to strong fluorescent though

I bet DH can source them!

 

[dk168]

Personally, I would opt for skinnier ECs for side stones rather than the chubby ones as seen in the inspiration photo.

DK

 

[MMtwo]

DH? Sorry, not sure who that is

 

[Lookinagain]

DH? Sorry, not sure who that is

Probably DK?